31,944 in 2000 up to 58,465 in 2010 - an 83 percent increase.
Currently 41 percent of recipients have a psychiatric or psychological disorder. Looking back, in 1971 there around 6,000 people on a sickness benefit at any given time and "mental, psycho-neurotic and personality disorders" accounted for 10.3 percent of "disease suffered by the beneficiary."
Notwithstanding far more people were hospitalised (as opposed to being supported on a benefit) 30 or 40 years ago, incapacitating mental illness, or the diagnosis of it, is on the rise.
The next biggest category is musculo skeletal conditions at 15 percent.
Interestingly Maori are over-represented at 26.6 percent of all sickness beneficiaries whereas Pacific people make up only 6.3 percent - slightly under their share of the total population. I wonder if this is because when Pacific people are ill they rely more on family? They tend to have poorer health, with higher rates of diabetes and some cancers, so it would follow that more rely on sickness benefits than is the case. Their reliance on the invalid benefit is even lower at 5 percent of the total. Perhaps Pacific people keep working through illness. Whatever the reason the difference between Maori and Pacific always fascinates me because it shows that belonging to a low socio-economic community (where conditions can often cause or aggravate ill health) need not automatically lead to benefit dependence.
7 comments:
Whatever the reason the difference between Maori and Pacific always fascinates me because it shows that belonging to a low socio-economic community (where conditions can often cause or aggravate ill health) need not automatically lead to benefit dependence.
The key word is "family" Lindsay, family bonds reinforced by the Christian faith - another element which is strong amongst the Pacific Island community.
In other words a strong social network structure which is the key to everything.
And the destruction of such structures has been the aim of the left for many years since they seek to replace them with big Government.
The fruits of which you see
belonging to a low socio-economic community (where conditions can often cause or aggravate ill health) need not automatically lead to benefit dependence.
Alternatively - if we just terminated all benefits then belonging to any socio-economic community would never lead to to benefit dependence.
1970 marked the start of widespread drug use in NZ. Might the accelerated mental deterioration reflect the graduation from Cannibis to Meths.
1970 marked the start of widespread drug use in NZ.
1970 also marked the state of widespread DOLE PAYMENTS in NZ.
Related... no, of course not.
THE ONLY WAY TO STOP BENEFIT DEPENDENCY IS TO STOP ALL BENEFITS
Anonymous you don't need to shout.
A lot of things have changed since 1970,
eg
in 1970 if you lost your job and went to Social welfare the chances are they would send you to work at the railways or the post office etc rather than give you the DOLE
And
only about one marriage in 12 failed rather than more than 1/3 today and that is an understatement because a lot of people don't marry but cohabit and therefore are not quantified
And
The vast majority of children were born into families where their father was married to their mother and both parents were there throughout their childhood
And
about 15 New Zealanders a year were victims of murder or Manslaughter - we probably get that in a month now
etc
Anonymous you don't need to shout.
Well you don't seem to get the damn point, do you?
in 1970 if you lost your job and went to Social welfare the chances are they would send you to work at the railways or the post office etc rather than give you the DOLE
Right - because if there was one job available you didn't get the dole. There are lots of job available in NZ - many more if the minimum wage went back to the 1970 nominal rate. But people don't want to do the jobs that are available - not makework jobs like post office or railways, but things people will pay for - domestic service, escorts, organ donors, security consultants in Afganistan etc. The main point is: don't pay people the dole.
And
only about one marriage in 12 failed rather than more than 1/3 today and that is an understatement because a lot of people don't marry but cohabit and therefore are not quantified
The DPB was introduced in 1974. The Status of Children Act 1969 removed illegitimacy as a legal status. Stop the DBP and you'll stop these problems.
You get what you pay for!
And
The vast majority of children were born into families where their father was married to their mother and both parents were there throughout their childhood
See above. Stop the DPB.
And
about 15 New Zealanders a year were victims of murder or Manslaughter - we probably get that in a month now
I fail to see what that has to do with anything. NZ's murder rate is one of the few mechanisms we have for adjusting the beneficiary demographic.
this says nothing. if I write on a form Im European AND Im Maori, they say Im Maori. If Im self identifying of both ethnic groups but middle class and need to go on a sickness benefit, the assumption becomes that Im lower socioeconomic because Im Maori. Indeed at one point I was a sickness beneficiary as I have a thyroid disease but my being Maori and being a sickness beneficiary had nothing to do with my 100k per annum earning stepfather whose home I lived in. You make a gigantic leap from sickness bene numbers to Maori to lower socio-economic and then you make a giant stab in the dark that this means Maori whanau structure is lacking because pacifica numbers are much lower.... too many leaps Im sorry.
Post a Comment